mikey287 wrote:Great find, FLPF. Thanks for that! I was unaware of the specifics of that mechanism.

Does it get into specifics about how/when a one-year deal is posted vs. a two-year deal in the new CBA?

From what I see, one-year versus two-year is decided by the "opposition," so if it is Player elected arbitration, the Team sets the length, and if Club elected arbitration, the player sets the length.

Article 12.9, paragraph (c), page 62

(c) Election of Term

The party against whom a salary arbitration election was filed (ie, the Club in Player-elected salary arbitration and the Player in Club-elected salary arbitration) shall elect in its brief whether the salary arbitration award shall be for a one or two-year SPC.

My copy and paste isn't working so I had to manually type that. Also notes that failure to disclose term automatically goes to 1 year SPC, if the player is 1 year away by age or experience from Group 3 Free Agency then only 1 year SPC can be awarded, and if player is eligible in 1 year for Group 5 Free Agency and a two-year SPC is elected the player can elect to void the 2nd year at the end of the first year of the SPC if year one salary is less than the Average League Salary for that year.

That said, I believe Group V free agency died a de facto death in 2005 with the new CBA. IIRC what that is correctly, I don't believe it's possible under the terms set forth in either of the past two CBAs. Perhaps I'm confusing it with another Group...confusion strikes again. I'll look into when I get home...thanks again for this, very informative...

That said, I believe Group V free agency died a de facto death in 2005 with the new CBA. IIRC what that is correctly, I don't believe it's possible under the terms set forth in either of the past two CBAs. Perhaps I'm confusing it with another Group...confusion strikes again. I'll look into when I get home...thanks again for this, very informative...

Your welcome, and you are probably right about Group 5. In essence, to qualify as Group 5, you need to play 10 seasons (doesn't matter if AHL/ECHL or NHL, juniors doesn't count) with a SPC value under the Average League Salary on your last year of the contract. Being that the Group 3 Free Agency age is 27, I don't think there would be any players that will qualify for this anymore.

shmenguin wrote:So now Neal wasn't a good fit on the PP. Eventually, he's going to be a small Asian man whose name wasn't even Neal.

well, do you think the pp is going to be significantly less successful with ehrhoff at the point, hornqvist down low, and malkin as the shooter on the half boards? with those weapons, i think neal's contributions become somewhat less special. plus, with a legit net front presence on the pp, we can get kunitz off our top unit, and maybe not have half a dozen goals disallowed for whatever reason

We still don't have a QB. The closest we had was malkin playing the point. So I don't think ehroff and Martin playing patty cake on the blue line will improve our pp. Sub letang in - same result. It will be worse than last year - if only because of how good last year's was. Largely because of one Neal, James. But to a more simple point - a swap of hornqvist and Neal definitely makes it worse. And to an even simpler point (the one which I was originally addressing), Neal was a fantastic PP player. And it's more pretend time to claim otherwise.

You're assuming the Penguins are going to retain the same power-play set-up that had last season as you make your assessment of how it's supposedly going to work. No one knows what the set-up is going to be. Knowing what we know about Johnston, it won't be Bylsma's overload set-up, which functioned off of a "rover" in the slot who's primary focus was to draw attention to himself to open up passing lanes in the middle of the ice.

That's the function James Neal served for this last year. Any player can fit into that mold, if the Penguins were to run the same system, they have guys on the current roster who could excel at it, namely Chris Kunitz. In fact, I'd argue that a set-up featuring Hornqvist in front of the net, which I would expect to see, would be a vast improvement in a very key area. So the argument that it makes an unknown power-play somehow worse isn't something that I can agree with.

Also, Christian Ehrhoff is a pretty good power-play QB, among other things. I don't agree with that assessment at all.

I'm not assuming anything about the tactical setup. We had the top PP % in the league last year and we got rid of the guy who scored PP goals at the highest rate, and we're either not even using the guy we got in return or we're replacing our PP goal leader with him. We can also add in the element of Sid and Geno having no clue how to play together as forwards if necessary.

It's not that I think the PP will be bad. It's that it won't be as good as last year. The opposite opinion would be startling.

Just like Whitney when he was looking like the next premier offensive d-man in the league.Just like Goligoski when he was looking like he was about to reach his potentialJust like when Hossa chose the RedwingsJust like when Malone chased money despite his chemistry with Malkin

GSdrums87 wrote:What an assumption to make after knowing literally nothing of who will and how will the new power play be executed. Maybe they're 100% next season thanks to Hornqvist, how could you ever know?

GSdrums87 wrote:What an assumption to make after knowing literally nothing of who will and how will the new power play be executed. Maybe they're 100% next season thanks to Hornqvist, how could you ever know?

Patric Hornqvist, Pittsburgh PenguinsThe highest-impact fantasy move in the last year, let alone the last week. Hornqvist just went from being a steady 50-point player to a possible 70-point player or more. In my rankings this month he shot up 96 spots thanks to his trade, as he will be earmarked for the Evgeni Malkin line.

James Neal, Nashville PredatorsFrom Malkin’s linemate to Colin Wilson’s. That’s quite the drop. Just as Hornqvist shot up 96 spots in my fantasy rankings, Neal dropped 40. He’ll help Wilson and whoever else is on the line (Craig Smith?). But his own point total will drop. Think 60 or 65 points now.

Patric Hornqvist, Pittsburgh PenguinsThe highest-impact fantasy move in the last year, let alone the last week. Hornqvist just went from being a steady 50-point player to a possible 70-point player or more. In my rankings this month he shot up 96 spots thanks to his trade, as he will be earmarked for the Evgeni Malkin line.

James Neal, Nashville PredatorsFrom Malkin’s linemate to Colin Wilson’s. That’s quite the drop. Just as Hornqvist shot up 96 spots in my fantasy rankings, Neal dropped 40. He’ll help Wilson and whoever else is on the line (Craig Smith?). But his own point total will drop. Think 60 or 65 points now.

That's exactly what I was thinking as well.

if these estimates are correct, the him-hawing is justified. doesn't really matter what neal does with nashville. this projects hornqvist as doing worse than neal did here.

Patric Hornqvist, Pittsburgh PenguinsThe highest-impact fantasy move in the last year, let alone the last week. Hornqvist just went from being a steady 50-point player to a possible 70-point player or more. In my rankings this month he shot up 96 spots thanks to his trade, as he will be earmarked for the Evgeni Malkin line.

James Neal, Nashville PredatorsFrom Malkin’s linemate to Colin Wilson’s. That’s quite the drop. Just as Hornqvist shot up 96 spots in my fantasy rankings, Neal dropped 40. He’ll help Wilson and whoever else is on the line (Craig Smith?). But his own point total will drop. Think 60 or 65 points now.

That's exactly what I was thinking as well.

if these estimates are correct, the him-hawing is justified. doesn't really matter what neal does with nashville. this projects hornqvist as doing worse than neal did here.

Do you watch a lot of hockey, or just play NHL14? In NHL14 point totals matter the most. In real life there are MANY other things that need to be considered.